When the Empaths (I feel strongly that…) within society find themselves intensely opposed to what the Logicians (logic tells us that…) within a society are proposing, that society is facing an existential problem. The same is true when the situation is reversed. How long the society may have before it suffers serious, if not irreparable harm, may vary but is a function of the intensity of the conflict.
Why does such a conflict weigh so heavily for the health of a society? Because both our feelings and our intellect exist for the primary purpose of counseling us on what pathway we should take in any given situation. To fail to give adequate consideration to either aspect of our innate guidance systems does not bode well. That is true whether the “we” is more accurately an “I’; an individual facing an internal conflict between their feelings and intellect, or an entire society in which the people more oriented toward a feeling/emotional experience of the world are at odds with the people more oriented toward an intellectual/logic related experience of the world. Such a conflict on either the intrapersonal or interpersonal level is an expression of the plight addressed by the axiom: “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” (Paraphrasing the Biblical reference Mark 3:25).
To put this in simpler terms, when the “warm and fuzzy” of an issue finds itself intensely opposed to the “cold and objective” of an issue, or vice versa, it does not bode well. Something significant is being missed (overlooked or ignored) most likely by the people on both sides of the issue. One thing that can be counted on if both sides are working in good faith, is that both sides of the conflict are, to a greater or lesser extent, grounded in reality. Another thing that can be counted on is that if those on both sides of such an issue would calmly sit down and the Logicians would try to empathize to understand the strong feelings of the Empaths, and the Empaths would try to see the reasoning of the Logicians, the chance for the best possible outcome becomes a possibility. In all likelihood when such an agreement is able to be worked out neither side is going to find their original position completely vindicated. However, neither side is going to find their original position completely invalidated either. The scales may tip more one way than the other, or not.
That being said, it is conceivable that one side may be completely right and the other completely wrong IF one side is not being completely honest. Or, if one side is attempting to further a covert agenda. If either side is pursuing special interests of some kind that also stands to confound the situation. Further, if the special interests are overly represented in the outcome, the outcome will not have the authenticity, the same potential, to produce the degree of favorable outcome it would have if that weren’t the case. If both the feelings and intellect, when expressed in authentic form, are working toward the wellbeing of the “whole”, any efforts to artificially distort those efforts, one way or the other, will distort and/or warp the authenticity and the effectiveness of the outcome. The “whole” will not be honestly nor optimally served. Whether the “whole” in question is an individual or a society.
For those who have been heavily indoctrinated in the pre-quantum physics illusion of separation and individualism, the proposition that a society may be a single interconnected organism and that all the citizens within that society are to a significant extent, as cells within a body, may seem subversive to some egocentric agenda or another. However, having said that, don’t conflate “interconnected” with “the same”. While all people share, to a greater or lesser extent, many common characteristics, we also have aspects to our authentic selves which, when taken altogether, are unique to us as individuals. That’s why over regimentation of a society is ultimately doomed to failure. But just as over regimentation does not create a viable society for human beings to live within, neither does anarchy. If we want healthy, viable societies, the recognition and honoring of the basic, mutually shared aspects of our lives is the bedrock upon which the basic structures of a healthy, vibrant, viable society, one which also provides room for the diversity so necessary to a healthy society, must be built.
When we know enough about ourselves and our mutuality, and we find the viable balance wherein we are honoring both the mutually shared aspects of our being and the more individual aspects, we will be a lot closer to being able to create the wonderful, viable lives within a wonderful, viable society that we have the potential to create. Until then we are allowing the illusions, the fears, the hatreds, the perversions, the distortions which in large part, if not in totality, are birthed by the lies and abuses which we have too often inflicted upon one another, control our present and our future.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is increasingly having the allegation leveled at him that he is destroying the Public Health system in the U.S. What is actually happening is that he is destroying the carefully and insidiously crafted illusion of a public health system that has been incrementally foisted upon the American public by profiteers. Profiteers from within a healthcare system which only exists with the trust of the public it is meant to serve. Yet increasingly the true recipients of the benefits served up by the system is becoming an issue.
One thing that I have seen over the past 7+ decades is that over that time there seems have been few, if any, originally honorable, originally beneficially effective public agency or elected office that have been immune from being usurped and turned to the service of corrupt profiteers if enough money is involved. Most, if not all, of the public officials, elected or appointed, who are at the forefront of the currently ongoing attempt to smear RFK Jr. and his efforts at reform have in the past and/or are currently directly or indirectly benefiting significantly from the vast sums of money that the corrupt profiteers are spending. Spending to keep their sordid, immensely financially profitable, businesses and schemes untouched by reform. Corrupt profiteers who influence or control so much of the health and medical and related industry in the U.S.
Over my lifetime I’ve witnessed the E.P.A., the C.D.C. and much of the medical industry as a whole go from admired, honorable, public services to agents of aforementioned profiteers. Profiteers who engage in practices which create and sustain widespread chronic illness in the American population. Apparently because that is how the most money is to be had.
Right now the E.P.A. is engaged in challenging the verdict from a Federal Court Case in the 9th District Court in California that ruled that fluoride presents an unreasonable risk to the health of children. If I hadn’t witnessed part of it taking place, E.P.A. attorneys working to allow the continuance of the insertion of one of the most toxic substances around into public water supplies, I would have a hard time believing that allegation. I happened to be able to view, via Zoom, the closing arguments. The Judge stated that the videos of the proceedings would be made available on the Court’s website. But again, as happens so often when there are people whose covert interests and methods wilt in the light of public scrutiny, somewhere in the process, there was an intervention and they have been censored.
If you’re still under the hypnotic illusion that “fluoridation is safe” check out the work done by Phyllis Mullenix regarding fluorides effect on cognition and Jennifer Luke’s discoveries regarding fluoride and the pineal gland. Also the information regarding fluoride’s carcinogenic properties brought forward, some decades ago, by Dean Burk an American biochemist, medical researcher, and a cancer researcher at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute and the National Cancer Institute. An issue most recently brought forward by William Marcus, M.D. who at the time worked at the E.P.A. He has had to pay dearly for his breaking lockstep with the “orthodox” litany that “fluoridation is safe”. There is so much more. Look into fluoride toxicity and the thyroid and the kidneys. Look into how fluoride renders bones and teeth more brittle.
But as horrible as the criminal fluoride scam being run on the American public is, it is only one of the issues involved with the usurpation of American medicine. The issues being most ardently defended/protected by those profiting from the involved practices, are the dangers, toxicity, of the COVID vaccines and other vaccines which RFK Jr. is exposing. Dangers due to the presence of mercury and aluminum. And, in extreme cases, dangers engineered into the vaccines to serve some covert agenda of those manufacturing them. These abuses of the public trust have been going on, with knowledge by at least key people in the pharmaceutical industry. And undoubtedly people working within agencies, such as the C.D.C., who American children are encouraged to trust via direct education to that effect and indirectly through their “white hat” portrayal in movies and other media.
I venture a lot of the people whose efforts are essential to keeping this ugly, perverted system alive really have no idea of the current nature of the system they’re serving. They are still seeing the efforts going on within those agencies as being what it was, at least what the public believed it to be, at the time of the agencies’ creation. That being said, not knowing and not wanting to know are two very different things. Willful ignorance and the best interests of the American public are diametrically opposed when it comes to the issues RFK Jr. is exposing within the American healthcare system.
When did it happen? When did people around the world begin to identify an entire nation on the basis of the character of whomever happens to occupy high political office within that nation? It’s as ridiculous a practice as trying to characterize the ocean on the basis of the behavior of a single fish. It always, absolutely always, provides us with a distorted, inaccurate, conception of the nation concerned.
Vladimir Putin is not Russia. Donald Trump is not the United States. Nor was Joe Biden, Barack Obama, nor any other President. Likewise Xi Jinping is not China and Volodymyr Zelenskyy is not the Ukraine. Droupadi Murmu is not India. No single man nor woman ever has nor ever will be the sum total of the nation which they find themselves in a position of leadership within. And so it goes with every single nation on the face of the Earth.
A nation is the people who live within it. A nation is the people who farm the land, occupy the cities, build the houses, clean the streets, cook the food, create the art, attend the concerts, eat at the restaurants, and generally participate in all the activities which sustain, enliven and enlighten the bodies and spirits, the hearts and minds, of the citizenry. If you travel the world it doesn’t take long to realize that the citizenry of every nation on Earth is pretty much the same. We breath, we eat, we love, we work, we play, we worry, we laugh, we eat, we read, we celebrate, we grieve. With our work, with the time and energy of our lives, we strive in myriad ways to improve our lives and the lives of others within our communities. So why do we, the citizenry of the nations of the world, allow the misbegotten, and often grandiose, aspirations, or the fears, of one person or group of people to lead us into conflict with one another? Conflicts which obliterate so much of what we and our ancestors have worked so hard to build? Cities, homes, farms, shops, restaurants, concert halls, hospitals, schools, the productions, the dreams, of so many people over so long a period of time. And then there are the human costs, the suffering, the deaths of so very many including family and loved ones.
War, conflict, any extreme competition which theatens the life or well-being of the citizens of any nation, or even a single individual, is something which threatens the life and well-being of us all. Why? Because the spirit of competition for territory or other worldly wealth inevitably leads to larger conflicts. Larger conflicts which lay the stepping stones on the road to war. It is like a contagious virus which spreads through the hearts and minds of people who are vulnerable to it. It breeds fear of those whom we perceive, or more often are told, want to take something from us which we hold dear. And we human beings have an innate tendency to try to destroy, to kill, that which we fear. On the other hand, to want others to fear us is inescapably, no matter how much we may think otherwise, to lead others to desire to destroy us.
We cannot fully develop our innate capacities as human beings when we live our lives burdened by fear; experiencing the stresses and debilitation, the actual trauma, which fear inevitably brings into our lives.
It’s high time we average people, average citizens, the true builders of civilizations, stop letting ourselves be blind followers of those among us with the most needy egos, the most avaricious among us, the most callous among us. It’s time we see through the half truths and outright lies the bought and paid for media outlets insistently try to present to us as reality. It’s time we realize our shared divine heritage here on this planet and treat ourselves and the planet with the love and respect we, and it, rightfully deserve.
With Robert F. Kennedy’s confirmation hearings taking place, if you’re paying any attention to them, we hear a lot about whether or not vaccines cause autism. The “orthodox” position is that they do not. The position RFK Jr. apparently is taking is that, at the very least, that is a question yet to be answered. I have spent a great deal of my life studying subjects directly, or indirectly, related to mental health. I am very interested in this question regarding vaccines and autism. I am aware that there are many studies which exist that purportedly show that there is no connection between vaccines and autism. That being said, further investigation into the matter, with the help of Microsoft’s AI, I don’t think it’s possible for a rationale person objectively investigating the issue to arrive at a sound position that there is no connection. In fact, it seems, the more I dig, that a connection is highly likely. But not one that has been sought out nor measured, to either prove or disprove, to any degree of certainty.
What we do know is that ethyl mercury and aluminum are present in some vaccines. We also know that heavy metals in general have been found to have a correlation with autism. We also know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the average person in an American city is exposed to a myriad of toxins in their environment, in their food, water and/or air, every day. Benzene for one, and many others. We also know that these toxins can interact with each other, sometimes in a synergistic fashion thereby creating an even higher degree of toxic burden upon the body of every man, woman, and child present in that city. So, just as with Aesop’s Fable of the crow and the pitcher of water, every stone that goes into the pitcher increases the water level within the pitcher (the body burden of toxins) until the water reaches the top and is available for the crow to consume. Or, in other words, the toxic burden reaches the point at which symptoms of one or more diseases appear with a person’s body.
Some of the diseases which we either conclusively know or have compelling reason to believe can be brought about in this manner include: cancer, autism, kidney disease, liver disease, heart disease, hypo-thyroidism, neurologic disorders, skin diseases, ADHD, and more. In fact, there is something so entirely synchronistic about the increasing prevalence of so many diseases in the population of all ages in the United States and the prevalence of so many toxic substances in our environment, that trying to assert that there is no correlation is a fool’s errand.
Also, if trying to authoritatively assert that the toxin in YOUR product is not correlated with any particular disease, the question becomes “how do you know that?”. Of course, when there is such a toxic “soup” concerned, it is possible to try to obfuscate which toxin, singularly or in conjunction with another toxin, are correlated with one or more of the ailments which are so pervasive in the American culture today. Regarding any lack of studies in this area, there is a saying that goes: “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”. This certainly seems applicable in this situation. As mentioned above, the increasing toxic burden presented by the pollution/toxic substances within our total environment and the increasing prevalence of so many diseases, are so synchronistic that trying to assert no correlation is like saying the rain does not contribute to the flowers growing. But trying to tease out the individual roles of the various toxins is somewhat like a courtyard filled with rioters throwing rocks and you want to find out who threw the rock that broke your window. I need to add that while such a feat of detective work is theoretically possible, I can find no evidence of one having been done regarding the heavy metals in some vaccines and autism.
In conclusion, the results found when measuring the effects of individual substances in pristine laboratory conditions does not, in any way, guarantee what the results are going to be when that substance is added to the toxic soup that has become the ambient environment in most, if not all, American cities. This is why we need Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to have a wide latitude of action in his efforts to ‘Make American Healthy Again”. We need someone to step in and to get all the toxins out of what we are eating, drinking, breathing and being injected with. Then, maybe, certain toxins may be able to be allowed for certain critical uses in a very limited, genuinely safe and responsible manner. But not the near free-for-all of toxic threats we are experiencing in the United States today.
There is freedom and there is power. They are not the same thing. However, our human cultural reality is that these two things very often rise and fall in a correlated manner within a population. I remember a few years back when someone asked the question of a young person what freedoms they would like to have. The young person said something like the freedom to travel by air whenever I want to so I can see the world. The person who asked the question then responded that what they were asking for essentially is the “power”, financial power, to travel by air whenever they wanted. They already possessed the freedom to travel by air whenever they had the means to do so. Sometimes we confuse freedom and power.
They truly are two different things. In the United States the Constitution of the United States of America has theoretically guaranteed our freedom as a God given inalienable right for over 200 years now. Yet, even from the first day that this Constitution took on the effect of the law of the land not all people within the new country were the beneficiaries of this noble, legal, statement. Why? Because some people did not have the power to effectually claim this freedom that theoretically existed all around them. Freedom and power, power and freedom, sometimes they are directly related. Sometimes power is essential to claiming one’s freedom, and sometimes power is what others use to take yours away. Even a cursory look through some history books should produce a number of striking examples of a cause-and-effect relationship between a people establishing their freedom through the use of power or losing their freedom due to someone else’s wielding of power to deprive them of it. So if power is essential to freedom, and we want freedom, how do we get power?
Francis Bacon, a Brit who lived between 1561 and 1626, is credited with delivering the pronouncement that “Knowledge is power.”. For most of humanity’s recorded history on Earth that statement has undoubtedly explained how one tribe or group has ascended into a notable position of recognized power. The knowledge of fire, of metallurgy, of gunpowder, of steam, gas, jet and rocket engines among other things has gradually increased one tribe or civilization’s ability to conquer another. Knowledge has most definitely been closely associated with power and it still is. Knowledge is still a key to humankind’s ability to survive and move forward into a brighter future. However, another kind of power has been growing, competing with knowledge. That is the power of wealth.
Some might say that knowledge is still the key source of power because it takes knowledge to accumulate vast wealth. There is some truth in that. There are ways in existence today, the stock market for example, via which someone who does not possess the creative talents to succeed as an inventor or farmer or entrepreneur can by sheer predatory cleverness amass a great fortune. Also, it doesn’t necessarily require a whole lot of knowledge when it comes to how wealth is utilized. Spending wealth on the myriad high-tech population management and weapons technologies that exist in the world today simply requires the will to do so. And it can require mere information, to employ surveillance and weapons technologies against others. Combine all this with the reality that a predatory shrewdness combined with marked deficits in empathy and sound ethics can and does lead people to “engineer” wars in order to increase sales in war related products and to acquire new resources for further exploitation. The point is power can be and often is simply bought these days. Consequently, the ability to give or take the freedoms of others with less power (money) can be bought along with it.
I think one basic principle of life which most people have learned is that too much power concentrated in the hands of one man, or woman, or relatively small group can and usually does lead to intentional, or unintentional, misuse and/or abuse of that power. Now substitute “money” for “power” and you should be able to see the fundamental problem which underlies a great many of the problems in the world today. We, the global masses of humanity, have allowed an economic reality to emerge in the world which not only allows but glorifies the acquisition of inordinate wealth. And we’re suffering the consequences of our short-sighted follies and and neglect. Of course, in our defense, we as individuals and as populations are all on a learning curve. Yet sometimes critical points are reached at which the costs of lessons unlearned, or unimplemented, can have disastrous effects beyond our expectations.
The real life quote “Greed is alright, by the way.” which Ivan Boesky delivered at a commencement speech at the U.C. Berkeley School of Business, which later seems to have been changed to simply “greed is good” by the cinematic character Gordon Gekko, seems to have been internalized by a large segment of the world’s population. Without going into a lot of detail this has resulted in a competitive business environment which has eroded the foundational ethics necessary for trustworthy, sustainable, healthy enterprises to flourish. At this point in time though, I think there is change happening among many young, and some older, entrepreneurs. Will this change prove to be lasting and genuine or is it merely PR tactic utilized by those who are trying to capitalize upon whatever human decency remains in the world until they get big enough to join in the orgy of greed?
It is important to realize that there are two ways in which greed driven individuals and businesses which routinely sacrifice morals and ethics upon the altar of “profit” negatively affect the prospects of humanity for a long, healthy life. The first is by what they produce in terms of goods/information that sabotages health, trust, and longevity. The second is by what they intentionally withhold that, were it released, would stand to greatly benefit human kind. This second method of harm is especially salient in any discussions of medical/health care and technologies for sustainable energy production. The latter arena of withheld technology has a huge, twofold, impact upon the environment. The first impact is in the opportunity to prevent pollution and the second is in the opportunity to clean up existing pollution. Both opportunities are being criminally ignored. A true crime of omission.
The “bottom line” to all this is that unless we, the majority, want to have our freedoms and many other aspects of our lives perpetually at the whim of one extremely wealthy individual/group or another, it is critical that we limit the amount of money/wealth which any one individual or small group can personally/privately acquire. Not to do so is to continue into a future filled with the sort of ego/profit driven wars, rampant poverty within the world and, as is clearly shown in this essay, the relinquishment of peoples’ freedoms and the stability of their futures and their children’s futures to the whims of the inordinately wealthy.
To do so will require a significant amount of restructuring of our current economic environment. I’m not going to try to delve into all the potential scenarios I’ve contemplated on this subject. I am going to say we can’t have simply a flat income for all people. Such a system would discourage personal incentive. And we can’t have too great a gap between the lowest income and the highest income. I’ve been told there is a Japanese study that suggests when the highest income is 7 times that of the lowest the culture can remain stable. Although I’ve tried to contact the source I heard about this study from I haven’t been successful at obtaining a reference. However, this figure does seem like a potential framework to look at. Some prices will drop, some will rise. Overall I think the cost of living will decrease. I invite you to mentally explore the possibilities that can accompany such a system.
As I heard somewhere recently: information is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom. We need all three of these resources being simultaneously employed for the benefit of all of humanity if we wish to avoid the dystopian future our current trajectory has us hurtling toward.
9/25/2024, Timely update: This just came through from the Fluoride Action Network: “After a precedent-setting 7-year legal battle in federal court, an historic ruling by the United States District Court of the Northern District of California has ordered the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take regulatory action to eliminate the “unreasonable risk” to the health of children posed by the practice of water fluoridation.“
This good news, boding well for the mental and physical health of Americans, may not necessarily mean that the practice of fluoridating public water supplies will now cease. I hope it does, however, we will see. I encourage you to read the rest of this post to both have some grasp of the reason for this verdict and to be forearmed if your local water supply does not act in compliance with this ruling.
I’ve been fortunate enough to be able to visit Alaska for the past week or so. I’m not staying in a city but rather in a rural location. I was in Alaska once before around 1999, it is easy to see there has been a lot growth in the cities, Juneau and Anchorage, since that period of time. I am guessing the same is true for a number of the more rural areas. It has gone through my mind that the influx of newcomers is taking the “Frontier” out of “The Last Frontier”. Still, Alaska is a major departure from the more populated areas in the lower 48. There is a seemingly never-ending bounty of natural beauty.
Once, years ago, I built a small cabin in a sparsely populated county in Eastern Washington State. I lived in it for a couple of years. It was an experience I relish but I’m glad to be in a more comfortable situation these days. Running water and indoor plumbing are nice additions to one’s home! That being said, being here in Alaska now is providing many flashbacks to those days in the cabin. Days of living life on a more basic level than most people in the United States. In a more basic environment a person’s more basic needs come front and center. We can get in touch, in a very personal way, with the real needs, as opposed to wants, of human life. Shelter, warmth, food, water, companionship, these are all must-haves for every person walking the Earth. To be missing any one of these is to have our lives on an extinction curve. If we’re missing food and water the curve is often more pronounced than if we’re missing shelter, but that is not always the case. It depends upon our environment.
For people who have always enjoyed the comforts of housing, transportation, regular and dependable meals, these things can quickly become taken for granted. Our minds often then busy themselves with other aspects of our culture. Things that can and often do become the focus of our attention might be things such as: what are the latest styles in clothing? What sports teams are on a winning or losing streak? What are the celebrities of the culture doing? Who are they dating, marrying, divorcing? One that seems to occupy a lot of minds is “how can I get more money?” These are some of the issues which consume some people’s time and energy.
However, at this time in the U.S. we’re seeing what happens when the basic material comforts of life, comforts people often have taken for granted, start to become less available, maybe even unobtainable. We’re seeing what can happen when ourselves and/or people around us being to experience stress and anxiety over meeting basic needs on an ongoing basis. We’re seeing individuals and groups begin to look around, to look for other individuals or groups which they may find some reason to blame for the stress and anxiety they’re feeling. The fact is, there are some individuals and groups which have a great deal of responsibility for the growing difficulty so very many are having obtaining the basic needs of life. But none of them are people or groups the average citizen is likely to encounter in their day to day travels and meetings. The hatreds and divisiveness we’re seeing in the U.S. in our streets, the growing number of impulsive reactions, sometimes violent, are usually based on relatively superficial criteria. Or on differences in values and/or opinions which, in the long run, have some importance but are not the things, the more fundamental issues, which are driving the deep anxieties and stresses that are so pervasive today. Fundamental issues such as the lack of safe, secure housing and nutritious, non-toxic food.
One other aspect of being closer to the Earth, closer to a life in which the basics play a larger role in day to day life is the realization of how little people in general in the United States seem to be upset by the increasing infringement taking place upon our housing and food safety and security. Such a beautiful world, such a beautiful country and such a heinously greed driven, corrupt and callous human management of it all. I find myself wondering: with so much anxiety and stress at large where are the focused, large scale efforts at correcting the wrongs taking place? Are people just blind, in denial, or expecting someone else; maybe a “nanny state” to take care of it all?
We the People do have the power, the right to engage in addressing blatantly wrong actions which are taking place within our communities, our nation. Blatant wrongs such as the poisoning of our soil, air and water, our food and our bodies. Blatant wrongs such as turning the nation that should be our home into just one giant, extortionate “profit” machine for a relative few who are somehow infected with insatiable greed.
There are, I’m sure, many contributing factors to the apparent complacency and apathy toward the deteriorating basic conditions of life in the U.S. I think there are a number of contributing psychological and sociological reasons. Some of these include the rise in the direction of public attention by the majority of media toward relatively trivial subjects and issues. Another is the amount of time people have to spend working in order to just keep up with expenses. It leaves people exhausted and just looking for relief, relaxation and/or entertainment at the end of the working day. And there is one insidious, almost imperceptible but significant factor, one contributing reason which I think is majorly overlooked: it is the role the fluoridation of most of the U.S. public water supplies plays in it all.
Fluoride is, among other things, a neurotoxin. This is proven in a multitude of studies most, if not all, of which can be found on the website of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN). The past few years this toxicity has been connected with lowering the I.Q.’s of children who were/are prenatally exposed to fluoridated water and other fluoridated products. There is an argument by those advocating for fluoridation that the low level found in most fluoridated water in the U.S. is too low to cause the I.Q. lowering, but this is an unsupported hypothesis. The fact is that dosages of fluoride for expectant mothers, along with everyone else, is impossible to regulate. This is because due to it’s use in around 70% of U.S. public water systems, fluoride has become pervasive in processed food and beverages. Even so-called “organic” foods and many bottled waters, beers and wines. Somewhere along the line the added fluoride in products (resulting from the fluoridated water used in growing/processing) was given an exemption from being required to be included in the ingredients of such products. When cooking with fluoridated water, such as making rice or pasta, when the water is boiled the fluoride does not boil away, it concentrates in the remaining water and the food being prepared. Also our bodies readily absorb fluoride when we shower or bathe in fluoridated water. So there are too many avenues of exposing ourselves to varying levels of fluoride intake for anyone to claim the dosages Americans are consuming is regulated. It should be mentioned here that fluoride is a poison in the same category as arsenic and lead.
So what? What does the reality around fluoridation have to do with all the other problems named earlier in this post? It is my hypothesis that the pervasive fluoridation to which Americans are exposed has an effect of producing a docility and compliant nature. A docility which those in industries engaging in fluoridation and other chemical, “legal” and/or economically abusive practices are enjoying the benefit of.* The days when large numbers of Americans were up in arms about DDT, tobacco, civil rights and the war in Vietnam were in the early days of fluoridation. Now, after a few more decades of fluoride consumption grievous abuses within our culture seem to be regularly overlooked. Our tax dollars are being used to create billionaires, in part through exorbitant defense spending and endless wars, we are being constantly exposed to toxic additives in our food and beverages, prices are rising much faster than wages, homeless camps are springing up all around the country. These are just to name a few examples of ongoing abuse taking place and the American public is largely silent. Why?
The issue of fluoridation is an excellent place for people wanting to do something which makes a difference in their community to hone their skills. This is because the information needed to show the wrongness of fluoridation is readily available and it is usually a local issue. If a person decides to enter into such activism to protect the health of themselves and their family, that person will probably be surprised at the resistance they meet and where it stems from. For instance, this is from the FAN website: “Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976, a group of non-profits and individuals petitioned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2016 to end the addition of fluoridation chemicals into U.S. drinking water due to fluoride’s neurotoxicity. The EPA rejected the petition. In response the groups sued the EPA in Federal Court in 2017. Evidence on fluoride’s neurotoxicity was heard by the Court in two phases: a 7-day trial in June 2020, and a 14-day trial in February 2024. As of May 2024, a judgment from the court has yet to be rendered.” I know growing up in the U.S. I always thought the EPA was established to protect Americans from toxic substances.
Yet this isn’t the only instance of the EPA acting in the interest of protecting the practice of fluoridation in the face of compelling evidence of negative health effects from fluoride consumption. Before the issue of fluoride’s neurotoxicity was being brought forward, in the 1970:s, Dean Burk, a biochemist who worked for a while with the National Cancer Society, along with biochemist John Yiamouyiannis expressed their concerns about fluoride being a carcinogenic substance. Later epidemiologists from the National Cancer Institute claimed to have refuted their findings. However, in 1990 a Senior Science Advisor at the EPA itself, Dr. William Marcus, “…lost his position after he documented that the Office of Drinking Water-approved and EPA-backed practice of adding fluoride to the nation’s drinking water supplies could lead to an increase in cancer rates…”. Reportedly Dr. Marcus became interested in this issue when a report came across his desk which involved using fluoride to give cancer to rats. It turns out rats are highly resistant to cancer and it takes a substance particularly capable of doing so to give rats cancer. These events are just a very few, but significant, items in the history of water fluoridation. For a more comprehensive chronology of this history
It all begs the question: What is going on within the EPA that lends them to so passionately defend the practice of pervasively exposing the American public to a known virulent carcinogen and neurotoxin?
Be aware the erosion of our health and wellbeing by fluoride is not a quick process, which is one reason it is so easy to deny and for people to believe the denials. This also means however that recovery from fluoride toxicity is not a quick process. But this in no way diminishes the importance of engaging in the process of actively working for clean water for healthy bodies and minds.
Well, I’m going back to looking out my window and enjoying the natural beauty of Alaska. I hope you have a long and healthy life. And I hope you’re ready to become active in the defense of the safety of your water, food and environment to assist in achieving it.
About my hypothesis: There used to be, 10 or more years ago, a report on the internet that after the Second World War personnel of our military/government learned of the Nazi’s use of fluoride in the Jewish ghettos and the prisoner of war camps. The reason given for doing this is that the Nazi’s believed (knew) that by doing so it heightened docility/compliant behavior among those affected. At the same time there was a report online that the Russians discovered the same information and that after the war they began experimenting with fluoridating the water in one or more their prisons. That report which I found online (but have been unable to lately) stated that after two years of fluoridated water difficult prisoners became much more docile/compliant. The report further stated that if they then removed the fluoride for two years the increase in docility stayed the same. This is consistent with what is known about how fluoride accumulates quickly and deteriorates slowly when it is in the human body. It is worth noting that sodium fluoride is also a potent antiglycolytic agent. That is, it prevents the body’s cells from breaking down and thereby using sugar for energy. I would not be surprised if this isn’t a part of the mechanism whereby fluoride produces an effect of increased docility in humans. Because the reports I mention here are, to the best of my knowledge, now unavailable online, my hypothesis of the production of an increased state of docility produced by fluoride becomes less supported by available facts. It is interesting to note however that instances of other people referring to such use of fluoride by the Nazi’s and denials of such a report do still exist online.
While there are hypotheses being put forward by those on both sides of the fluoride issue, the evidence of fluoride’s being a poison, it’s neurotoxicity and carcinogenic ability are fact. Without water fluoridation the benefits of topical application of fluoride for whatever dental benefits it may provide are still readily available via toothpastes and mouth rinses.
In summary, it’s not that there is not evidence of fluoride’s toxicity. The reality is that there is so much evidence that someone being exposed to it for the first time might quite possibly think that it can’t be true. That if it is true they would have been told about it already! Regardless, there is a bounty of evidence that fluoride is toxic and thoroughly capable of causing harm within the human body. There is also circumstantial evidence such as the rising prevalence of cancers in the U.S. and the drop in U.S. I.Q. score and academic ranking relative to other countries, which suggest it has already been at work doing such damage. Does it make any sense to continue to indiscriminately dose so many people with this toxic substance?
If you’re already actively involved with working to help balance the inequities and prevent/clean up the pollution that is taking place in the U.S., kudos and thank you.
First, let me define my terminology. By “Establishment” I mean those entrenched, politically and financially powerful people who jealously guard those aspects of the status-quo which are structured to serve their desires for the ongoing or increased acquisition of worldly wealth and power. Other terms which I’ve heard used to describe elements of this segment of the world’s population are: the military-industrial complex, the oligarchy, the 1/10th of 1 percenters, and I’m sure there are other terms used especially in different countries. Since WWII this segment of the population has done exactly what President Eisenhower warned us about in his 1961 farewell address : “This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience…[while] we recognize the imperative need for this development…We must not fail to comprehend its grave implications we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence…The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Now, from the vantage point of the 21st century, we can say with confidence that President Eisenhower had 20/20 foresight on this issue.
How does a segment of the population who all have similar, and often overlapping, interests in seeing certain aspects of the world’s socio-economic condition remain at the current status-quo go about accomplishing their goal? In a word: control. Control the banks, the media, elected and unelected officials holding key governmental offices, people holding key leadership positions within the military, the major industries including the energy industry. Control every thing you can that has to do with the economic, political and the religious/spiritual aspects of public life. And then, every so often, engage in an exercise in which you make behavioral demands upon the general public using rationales which have no solid foundation in reality just to get the public used to accepting orders blindly. New technologies make possible levels of monitoring of the behaviors of private citizens which would have been impossible in the 1960’s.
However, even with the utility of modern surveillance technologies, the ability to sway public opinion using the mainstream media and exotic chemical and electromagnetic technologies, the ability to manipulate what does and does not get into school textbooks, with all this and more, there still are limits on how much any person or group of people, no matter how wealthy or influential, are able to control the masses of humanity. Within any group of people there are variables of experiences, education, and interests which can serve to foil external attempts to overly control a large population. Which brings us to the three-body problem.
In physics it is exponentially harder to predict the movement of three masses orbiting each other than it is to predict the movement of two masses orbiting each other. These challenges are known, respectively, as the three-body problem and the two-body problem. We can learn from this that even when we are talking about objects which are inanimate mass, there are a variety of forces which can come into play. trying to predict the behavior of three objects orbiting each other is very difficult. Co-Pilot AI has these things to say regarding the three-body problem: “…while the two-body problem is a straightforward calculation, the three-body problem requires complex numerical simulations and does not have a one-size-fits-all solution, making it exponentially harder to predict.”
So, if coming up with a long-term prediction of the movements of three masses orbiting each other is very hard if not impossible, if your task is to predict the movement of masses over an extended period of time wouldn’t you appreciate it if you could trim the problem down from three to only two masses? Then, imagine how much harder even the two-body problem becomes if you’re dealing with human beings rather than inanimate objects. Inanimate objects whose essential characteristics are fixed and predictable.
With any two or more humans variations within their internal ecology and worldview are not only possible they are likely if not inevitable. Also changes to those conditions can and do occur at any given moment. Such variations, especially spontaneous changes within those variations, produce unpredictable independent variables: chaos. We can safely say that it is exponentially more complex to predict, never mind control, the movements of three people as opposed to only two.
When the “body” in question is group of people, such as a political party, then any attempt at predicting or controlling that body is going to depend largely upon having one or more key “influencers” within the group. Even then, factors beyond the control of those who wish to exert it can enter in and confound things.
Think about it, if a relatively small, covert group of people have invested countless hours of research, a great deal of financial investment and managed to acquire great power and influence within not just one, but two major political parties, how willing would you be to simply surrender that control? Especially if the exercise of power and influence within those two parties translated into enormous power and influence within the involved nation. What the realities inherent in three-body problem ensure is that if a third viable political party emerges within that system you better be prepared to expend exponentially greater amounts of human and financial resources if you want to maintain the same degree of power and influence which you have become accustomed to, For those wishing to control the system I don’t think it would be overstating things to say that is a monumental problem. When the system in question is the electoral and political system of the United States, I submit that for the average citizen desiring the system to work in the manner we have been taught that it is supposed to, the three-body problem becomes a great blessing.
This is the reality facing the people and the American political process at this time. Increasingly over the past few decades we have seen the Presidential election process become harder and harder for any aspiring candidate who is outside the mainstream political current to become a viable candidate for the Presidency or any elected position on the Federal level. Two major events which helped bring about this reality one is the repeal of the fairness doctrine of the Federal Communications Commission which became a policy in 1949. This doctrine “…was a policy that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that fairly reflected differing viewpoints.”, Wikipedia. While there were controversies which emerged regarding the doctrine, rather than amending it where it may have rightfully required doing so, in 1987 the decsion was made within the FCC to abolish it. This decision made coverage by the media of elections, candidates and their views something totally up to the discretion of whoever controlled any particular media outlet. What this translates into in today’s reality of increasingly monopolized big corporation media is that we hear what they want us to hear and we see what they want us to see. What we are seeing is that the mainstream media is all but completely ignoring RFK Jr.’s candidacy. Further that whenever there is some mention of his positions it is usually in the form of pejoratives and cartoons which ridicule but never explain. This prejudiced closed system fighting to maintain a dominance over our political reality is a manifestation of what President Eisenhower was warning us about in his farewell address.
The second major event which has assisted in increasing the control a relative few are wielding within the U.S. Presidential/Congressional election process was the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling on the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC). This ruling in essence turned the possibility of running a campaign to be elected to any Federal office into an exclusive club for the extravagantly wealthy. If a candidate is not extravagantly wealthy, to have any chance of success at all it is all but required that they have sufficient backing from people who are. These days it seems “donating” extravagant funds into any candidate’s campaign coffers is akin to investing in that candidate as a business venture. While the emergence of a viable third (fourth, fifth, etc.) party does not in and of itself do away with the Citizens United v. FEC ruling, by negatively affecting the ability of any group to predict and control the total field of candidates running for Federal office it increases the chances that someone with a mindset more sympathetic to the living conditions of average Americans might be elected to office. Which might lead to an effort to see that ruling repealed.
One thing American citizens need to be aware of is that while some or possibly even many of the people who have acquired this “unwarranted influence” are Americans by birth or naturalization, that cannot be said for the totality of those that have done so. Also, whether they are U.S. citizens or not, their actions are not limited in any way to affairs within the United States. Their agendas and their actions are transnational.
I would venture that even if RFK Jr’s political aims were largely consistent with the goals of those exercising unwarranted influence his candidacy might well still be regarded as problematic by them. This is due to the aforementioned three-body problem and the complications inherent in allowing a viable third party to emerge within the American political system. But RFK Jr.’s stated political aims clearly aren’t all that consistent with the goals of those, again, wielding unwarranted influence within the governmental policies and practices of the United States. The same could have been (and was) said of the aims of his uncle, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy and his father Robert F. Kennedy in their political careers. I, for one, do not want to see the violence that befell these two Kennedy brothers in the 1960’s, or any violence at all, become a reality within the election or political processes in our current time. We ought to be able to use our reasoning abilities to conceive of and work with positive aims and actions that benefit all of humanity. To do anything less is to fail, again, to recognize the truth within another, lesser-known quote from President Eisenhower’s 1961 farewell address: “…America’s leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.”
Lastly, I would like to call attention to the subject of chaos and what it means in regard to the health of the American culture. First, there are a few different interpretations of the world “chaos”. The online Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines chaos as:
“1 a: a state of utter confusion
the blackout caused chaos throughout the city
b: a confused mass or mixture
a chaos of television antennas
2 aoften capitalized: a state of things in which chance is supreme
especially: the confused unorganized state of primordial matter before the creation of distinct forms…”
b: the inherent unpredictability in the behavior of a complex natural system (such as the atmosphere, boiling water, or the beating heart)” (My italics.)
I think that quite possibly the average person’s mental image of chaos is something like a scene in a movie in which a 200 ft. tall reptile emerges from the ocean and begins wreaking havoc. The behavior of the populace is usually quite chaotic in such scenes. This type of chaos is what is defined in “1 a” above.
However, I think the best definition for the type of chaos which people who are oriented toward predicting and controlling a governmental, cultural or other human involved situation are facing is that found in “2 b” above. “Inherent unpredictability” does not lend itself well to attempts at control. Yet, as stated in the definition, this type of chaos is inherent in the behavior of a complex system. This implies that the behaviors we think of as “chaos” in a complex system are in fact essential aspects of the processes of growth and development within these systems. These “chaotic” behaviors are meant to be present and if curtailed it is at the risk of jeapordizing the natural processes at work up to and including the health, the viability of any living organism.
When we human beings set out to control one aspect of nature or another we have to be aware that any overly intrusive, overly rigid type of control, relative to the nature of the subject of control, is most likely going to have a profound deleterious effect on the thing we are trying to control. One example of this is that if people are compelled to think in a rigidly controlled manner. What we have seen historically is that their creativity is going to suffer for it. Back in the days of the Cold War (approx. 1945-1989) between the Western Bloc and the Eastern Bloc, this was a criticism often levelled at the more rigidly controlled cultures within the Eastern Bloc. A perusal of the music and the art which were being produced within the Western and Eastern Blocs provides a clear reference point on the truth in that criticism. It’s not that no worthwhile music or art was being produced within the Eastern Bloc, however, at the same time the West was enjoying an explosion of creativity in these and many other areas.
In order to have a healthy human culture it is necessary to find a viable balance between structure and freedom. The cultures within the Eastern Bloc during the Cold War obviously went too far down the path of rigid structure. Some might say certain behaviors, such as the Hippie subculture taking place in the Western Bloc went too far toward individual freedom. But I would say that in order to have a healthy, viable human culture we must have the tolerance to allow for the exploration of radical departures from some norms at any given time. However, there is real danger to the health of a culture posed by the extremes of either overly dismissing cultural organization and structure, which is at one end of what might be called a structure-freedom continuum, or to trying to impose a pervasive totalitarian rule on the other.
At this time those with “unwarranted influence” are currently moving us toward an ever-increasing culture of totalitarian control. Citizens United, the criteria for a candidate to be included in the nationally broadcast debates, the monopolization of our national media along with the control/censorship which has attended this development are all serving to restrict not just the number of candidates in a Presidential election, these factors are even determining to a very great extent who is allowed to be among that number. It seems that one of the goals of those moving us toward a totalitarian state is that the common U.S. citizen may have a choice between two candidates but both of those candidates will have been vetted and approved by those controlling the system.
As controls tighten within our culture, every new rule and/or development that limits the freedoms of and/or diminishes the economic health of the general public works to further quash the inherent desire for freedom and creativity within all of humanity.
That is why Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s third party bid for the Presidency at this time is such an important thing. Almost regardless of his platform just his presence in the field of viable candidates serves to bring alive the three-body problem on the national political scene. If he is elected that will be a significant step in loosening the controls those with unwarranted influence have imposed and interfering with the imposition of further totalitarian policies. More directly, RFK Jr.’s stated goals include several which further threaten the agendas of those with or seeking unwarranted political/cultural influence.
These things explain a lot about why the Establishment is endeavoring so diligently to consign RFK Jr. to obscurity. The act of denying him traditional Secret Service protection is just one more indicator of the level of threat they perceive in him. Those holding unwarranted influence within the United States have no desire to relinquish any of their ever-tightening political/cultural control. Political/cultural control which is to a significant extent enabled by the predictability and controllability of Presidential and Congressional elections being limited to a two-body problem.
When we in the U.S. have a new President, a new administration, come into office, a lot of people are watching to see what happens. Will this President and his staff be more or less interested in the well-being, the health of the general populace or will they just be another place holder in the line of succession of Governmental servants of big money? Of course, every new administration presents something different. Different positions on the issues of immigration and abortion are two perpetual distractions. However, since JFK was so brutally removed from office there has been an ongoing movement within Governmental activities toward wars, extravagant military spending, along with legislation and policies most favorable to the wealthiest few among us. The past few decades have also brought us a number of domestic events, which the official explanations of have raised lingering questions among critical, reasoning, knowledgeable people. A few such events are the assassinations of JFK, MLK and RFK, the Sept. 11, 2001 WTC attack. There are a lot more.
The lack of satisfactory official reports/explanations for such culturally important events, events which have significantly affected the overall culture of our nation and the lives of everyone in it, raises questions about the level of trust we the people should have in those persons putting such questionable explanations forward. This pattern also raises doubts about the integrity and the agendas of those in positions of high office who do not concern themselves with restoring and/or maintaining the public trust by honestly addressing the many lingering, sound questions.
Which brings me to the main reason I’m writing this. It is to say that we as responsible, concerned citizens and human beings, in our assessments of the veracity and loyalties of our elected officials, need to look at what they aren’t doing with as much critical awareness as we put into looking at what they are doing. The things that go undone indicate as much about the agendas and priorities of those in elected office as the things they take action on.
That being said, here are a few of the things clearly not receiving Governmental action. Items which if addressed would go a long way to indicate to the general public that the agendas and priorities of those in high elected office are consistent with the best interests of the general population.
More stringent, effective prevention of toxic substances in our water, food, air and the merchandise being sold in our stores.
More regulatory control over prices especially in the area of fundamental necessities such as medical care, health insurance, housing, food, utilities. In general, we should not turn our nation into an anything-goes feeding ground for predatory corporations.
Disclosure of all information relevant to the culturally significant issues of the past and present for which satisfactory, complete and conclusive explanations have not been forthcoming.
The utilization of our national wealth to address domestic issues which reflect a definite and effective prioritization of the health and well-being of the citizens of the United States. Actions which show a healthy respect for the well-being of the populace in both their aims and the processes used in implementing them.
A cessation of the practice of retaliatory attacks by Governmental officials and agencies upon whistleblowers who are bringing to light truths regarding covert and illegal conduct on the part of our Governmental officials and agencies. Conduct which the public should be aware of in order to participate effectively as responsible citizens within our democratic republic.
We need a Government in which our officials and agencies embody a primary value of service to the general citizenry. The sanctity of the trust of the general public should be one of the highest priorities within Governmental function.
We are in the midst of a pandemic. Not COVID nor a new viral concoction those disposed to do so may be devising. It is a pandemic of mental/spiritual origin and effect. The infectious, destructive condition I’m referring to has been with us for millennia. It is a condition, a dis-ease if you will, which leaves many of those affected languishing in the belief that the “physical” world is our primary, if not our only reality. Or, others affected often see fit to engage in overly self-centered, sometimes brutal, schemes for personal gain. Schemes which ignore the damage such thoughts and actions are doing within our underlying spiritual reality. Damage which sooner or later expresses itself within our “physical” reality.
Above I put “physical” in quotation marks because, as with light waves which we can only see a certain portion of the full spectrum of, our physical reality also extends beyond the denser forms and actions we’re all accustomed to dealing with in our day to day lives. It extends into finer, more ethereal, spiritual aspects of our reality which those who are infected with the mental condition leading to the denial of this reality apparently find beyond their perception. Or possibly they have some perception of it but for reasons having to do with their enculturation choose to ignore such perceptions. Yet inescapably we affect and are affected by the finer, more ethereal aspects of our reality.
This condition, which results in a narrow window on our world, is a mental/spiritual condition which many seem to accept as part of the price for being a “good citizen” of a materialistic, competitive culture. I wonder how many people are receiving treatment both in outpatient and inpatient settings simply because they found themselves perceiving and finding reality and meaning within some of the forms and actions within the more ethereal aspects of our reality? How a person reacts to perceiving things outside the realm of what their culture may regard as normal is often determined by whether or not they primarily regard the world with an attitude of fear or an attitude of faith.
It is when we are able to stretch out our perceptions more fully into the finer, more ethereal/spiritual aspects of our existence, our reality, that we can discover many blessings and abilities which remain out of our reach when too many daily stressors push us into a withdrawn, shut-down state of being. When fear and anxiety are intrusive into our lives, we tend to draw in, to shut down some of the higher functioning parts of our mind, our being. This loss of so much of the potential richness of our lives is one of the cruelest of the collateral damages within a culture of competition.
We see so much cruelty, so much inhumanity resulting from people holding an attitude of fear, avarice, intolerance, that it is easy to be deceived into believing that these ways of relating to the world are the underlying, inescapable reality of our existence on Earth. They aren’t. Love is the underlying reality. However, when unguided by compassion and sound reason, even love can produce perverted, destructive actions. Such as when, as I have seen it expressed, we “love things and use people instead of loving people and using things”. Or when we love the experience of our own being yet choose to callously disregard the experiences of others.
Creating a culture of fear is relatively easy. Engage in violence, do things which blatantly and glaringly or subtly and insidiously injure people. Engage in actions which engender distrust. Use political/economic schemes with armed legions of enforcers to take away and control the goods and freedoms of the general population of entire nations (even your own). Those involved in the thinking patterns and behaviors which lead to the creation of cultures of fear are following their most self-centered, self-serving impulses with little or no concern for the effects which their actions impose upon, or evoke within others.
Creating a culture of love, compassion, and understanding is a harder task. The desire to do so usually is preceded by the awareness that we are all interrelated. For one thing, we are all a part of the environment which all other people live within. However, when we learn more about the energy/spiritual reality of our lives we understand how we are quite literally interconnected on an energetic/spiritual level. Someday I imagine there will books written about the effects each person’s spiritual energy contributes to our spiritual environment. We now know beyond a doubt that groups of people meditating in an area can reduce the crime rate. Manifesting a culture which is an expression of the positive, life-oriented aspects of our underlying spiritual reality requires people to be willing to put the time and effort into understanding themselves and others. It requires compassion and patience when facing difficult interpersonal situations. It requires tolerance of different practices and worldviews as long as those practices and worldviews are not inherently harmful to others. It requires people to have a rock-solid commitment to the well-being of others as well as one’s own.
Right now we are living in a world in which far too many are suffering under the pestilence of a culture of fear, avarice, intolerance. Many are reaping the bitter fruits of devoting time and energy into fear, hating and war. Many are reaping the bleak fruits resulting from the personal or cultural allotment of large amounts of human and material resources for the building and acquisition of weapons of destruction. The more energy, time and resources we pour into these things the more we see war and destruction proliferating around the world. After all the teachings, the warnings we have had through the ages from saints and prophets about reaping what we sow, this sorry reality should come as no surprise.
I would rhetorically ask what we should do about it, but the answer is obvious: we need to start consistently sowing the words and actions which are exactly those which we genuinely would like to have returning to us and our loved ones. That’s all.
First, it is important today for any thinking, inquisitive person who is genuinely seeking truth to realize the corporate, monopolized media is a powerful tool used to support the agendas of the powerful individuals and groups who control them. That is why it is always wise to question the information presented by that media. Unless you have engaged in actively searching information about “free energy” or “zero point energy” devices you probably know little or nothing about them.
Just imagine…what if devices which can be as small as a pack of cigarettes could give us usable energy just by pulling that energy from the ambient energy in the universe around us? Because such devices are not particularly costly to manufacture, they could be relatively inexpensive and once purchased the energy they provide would be free. They could power homes, cars, aircraft. Individual appliances could have their own small energy source. There would be no more need for “the grid”, oil or natural gas pipelines, filling stations, recharging stations, high energy bills. And this energy would be available anywhere on Earth from the most remote desert to the polar regions. Imagine what this could do to improve the quality of life for humanity around the globe. Energy for lighting, cooking, heating, cooling, any purpose you can imagine, would be immediately available, anytime, anywhere. Energy intensive systems to reduce and eliminate industrial pollution, which now are prohibitive due to the high energy costs involved could be immediately employed because the energy costs would be almost nothing.
Science fiction? No, science fact. While it is maintained by many who have insider knowledge of what is happening with technology reverse engineered from crashed extraterrestrial craft that such energy devices are possible, it isn’t necessary to go to such exotic sources to find this technology. There are inventors, scientists, right here on Earth who have invented such devices. Why haven’t you heard about them?
Now, consider that these inventions have been around for decades. Not months or years, decades…even over a century. In this next section I am going to provide a link to an article about each of three inventors who have invented free energy devices. I am doing this rather than re-writing the material in this article. I encourage you to go to these articles and to do further research! Just “click” on the names to access the linked article. Nikolai Tesla (1856-1943), Floyd Sweet (1912-1995), Joseph Newman (1936-2015) all are known to have invented devices capable of accessing the ambient energy around us. In Joseph Newman’s case he was fortunate enough to attract the attention of a television news reporter out of New Orleans. Possibly due to this fortuitous meeting Newman’s device was scrutinized by many scientists from various places, including NASA. Further, many of these meetings and the statements of the investigators are recorded on film. They can be viewed in the documentary “Newman”. However, the reality of Newman’s invention wasn’t enough to get past the heavy-handed influence of the organized suppression of such devices.
Another related invention is the water powered car which was invented by Stanley Meyer (1940-1998). This technology also had implications within the search for free energy. As with Joseph Newman, Stanley Meyer’s invention was well recorded on film and did receive some major national news coverage. He was murdered in 1998. (It is also strongly suspected that Floyd Sweet was murdered.) The methods used by powerful, ruthless interests who do not want to see free energy become a reality apparently range from buying such devices and making the invention disappear to murdering the inventors. Who would want to do such a thing?
What is going on at the highest levels within the economic/industrial/political world is such a total corruption from anything having to do with the good of humanity it is all but inconceivable. The ongoing efforts of those involved to suppress free energy technologies are responsible for unnecessary poverty, suffering and deaths. This suppression cannot be taking place without the collusion of various individuals within governmental agencies. This reality is so diabolical, so callous in it’s regard for human well being that many people may have difficulty considering it. The answer to most, if not all, of the world’s energy, ecological, food, and many of the medical problems in existence is being brutally suppressed. At this point, fortunately, they have not been successful at eliminating all references to these technologies.
In closing I want to strongly recommend that you watch the documentary “The Lost Century: And How to Reclaim It“. A film by Dr. Steven Greer, it is available on many websites including “Rumble” (linked above) and Amazon. In the documentary Dr. Greer provides considerable information, with video, on all the inventors/inventions I have mentioned in this article and more. Dr. Greer also addresses the ultimately self-defeating mentality of many of the inventors whose inventions are in the category of revolutionary energy saving or energy producing devices. This film is quite possibly one of the most important films of the past few decades.
kendunning.net 